"Sun Stroke" would be a better title - if not to describe the disorienting feeling of viewing it, then to describe the leading men - who can't seem to stop doing it to each other. The first 30 minutes are plausible, if slow and poorly written, but then the story becomes a muddle of flashbacks, flash forwards and God knows what else. The director admittedly wanted to 'disorient' the viewer (inspired by Bunuel, he claims) and, well, he succeeded! Sadly, the photography is as poor as some of the dialogue. The film looks to be shot on end stock, which is distracting enough. The dialogue is similarly clunky. "You ask a lot of questions," one hunk says three times to a writer whose shacked up in a desert to finish his novel. But not once does the guy have the wit to follow up with "What are you writing, a book?" Although the leads are fairly credible, the few others are not so good, including the actor playing Crispin, the mysterious owner of said shack. By the end of this extremely languid 90 minutes, I had no idea what was what nor did I care. I suggest a sequel set at the McDowell Colony in January. Call it "Frost Bite".
17 Reviews
Director/editor should have more faith in their plot
anachreon15 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
The basic plot of this film, once it is conjured from the non-linear presentation, is quite sound, almost Hitchcockian. But...either the director or the editor (or both) decided to distribute key components of the story in a chaotic fashion, presumably to represent Leo's psychosis. It doesn't work well. The actors need a tune up,as does the photography. I am certain they meant well, but inexperience and lack of training seem to be the culprits here. The makers have good taste in material, but don't seem to trust it. I'd even suggest remaking the film, using a professional linear approach, as the story deserves it. The idea of Svengali gay guy using a psychotic bisexual to seduce, then murder a writer in order to steal saleable creative work is an interesting one, indeed.
Self-indulgent muck, but quite pretty
alanjj7 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I am looking over the list of works by the director, Patrick McGuinn, and I wonder how this guy supports himself with such a lackluster resume. Trust fund? (After further research, I see that he's Roger McGuinn's son; all that Byrds money lets him stay 8 Miles High.)
This film is a muddle. I stayed for the Q&A after its showing at the LGBT Festival in NYC, and the mind of the director is also a muddle. It seems there's this house out in the desert of Southern California, and Leo (very handsome) who seems to have a wife (neither the audience nor the director is sure whether she is real or imaginary) stays at the house a lot. The house is owned by a writing instructor, who allows another young man, Teddy, to stay at the house to finish his novel, entitled "Goodbye." Leo is not sure whether he's bi, Teddy is sure that he is gay, and craves Leo. Lots of drinking, dancing, and tentative sex ensues. Or maybe it doesn't, who knows?
Also, there may or may not be a murder (the director isn't sure), and maybe Teddy disappears, and maybe the novel is published after Teddy disappears. There are pastiches and montages and all kinds of other things that the director, in his confusion, felt the need to do.
Oh, and the director had the gall to compare his film to "Last Year at Marienbad," only that film "is much more experimental" or something. Mr. McGuinn, you are no Alain Resnais.
This film is a muddle. I stayed for the Q&A after its showing at the LGBT Festival in NYC, and the mind of the director is also a muddle. It seems there's this house out in the desert of Southern California, and Leo (very handsome) who seems to have a wife (neither the audience nor the director is sure whether she is real or imaginary) stays at the house a lot. The house is owned by a writing instructor, who allows another young man, Teddy, to stay at the house to finish his novel, entitled "Goodbye." Leo is not sure whether he's bi, Teddy is sure that he is gay, and craves Leo. Lots of drinking, dancing, and tentative sex ensues. Or maybe it doesn't, who knows?
Also, there may or may not be a murder (the director isn't sure), and maybe Teddy disappears, and maybe the novel is published after Teddy disappears. There are pastiches and montages and all kinds of other things that the director, in his confusion, felt the need to do.
Oh, and the director had the gall to compare his film to "Last Year at Marienbad," only that film "is much more experimental" or something. Mr. McGuinn, you are no Alain Resnais.
Rich, lush, sensual, beautifully incomprehensible
jm1070126 June 2009
I'm greatly (and, it seems, unusually) blessed in being able to enjoy things without understanding them. I have no idea what Sun Kissed is "about": whether Leo and Teddy are one person, or two, or none; whether this is a coming out story or a psychological allegory or a murder mystery, or all three, or something else; whether anybody was murdered or when; whether anything in this movie actually happened or not. I don't know, and I don't care. I was very gratified to learn from previous reviewers that Patrick McGuinn refused to provide any explanations when interviewed. Good for him!
I happen to love movies like this, that defy understanding, that force me either to accept them on their own terms and see if I can enjoy them, or reject them. I gave Sun Kissed a chance, and I'm very glad I did.
I understood nothing, and I enjoyed every second, from the first frame to the last note in the dark. I don't know what it was, and I don't know why, but I sure did like it. It was a rich, lush, sensual, engrossing experience that I'd welcome again any time, anywhere.
I happen to love movies like this, that defy understanding, that force me either to accept them on their own terms and see if I can enjoy them, or reject them. I gave Sun Kissed a chance, and I'm very glad I did.
I understood nothing, and I enjoyed every second, from the first frame to the last note in the dark. I don't know what it was, and I don't know why, but I sure did like it. It was a rich, lush, sensual, engrossing experience that I'd welcome again any time, anywhere.
Beautiful Men - Confusing Movie
mahkel16 July 2006
I stayed after the film for a Q & A with the director in the hopes that he could explain the film. In fact, someone even yelled from the rear of the theater, for an explanation. All the filmmaker could say was that he was a fan of surreal films. This was apparently his bow to surrealism. That didn't explain the awkward editing, the jumping from one point in the time line to another, the not knowing what was real and what was imagined, nor the confusing film in general. I will say the two leads acted well, and looked even better. I'd love to see what they could do in another film. While I support new filmmakers and wish them the best, this film needs direction and a new edit.
Incredibly bad
jrcham9421 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I'm a fan of gay indie film and can usually find something to appreciate in even the smallest-budget movie. But Sun Kissed has nothing, NOTHING to recommend it. A Young Writer rents a house in the desert north of Palm Springs from an Old Queen (both performances atrocious, by the way) to finish a novel. Young Writer gets Cute Neighbor drunk after an afternoon of crazy dancing and hosing each other down with a hose (huh?) and gives him a blow job, and then throws a childish tantrum because Cute Neighbor wants to leave the next morning. Turns out Cute Neighbor may have killed his wife but returns to Young Writer to steal his novel. Or maybe HE wrote the novel. Maybe Young Writer doesn't exist. Maybe wife doesn't exist. Who knows? Who cares? The script is a nonsensical mess that McGuinn tries to pass off a "mysterious" or "arty". It is neither. The cinematography is bad even by the standards of a first-year film student, ranging from washed-out images to trite shots of hummingbirds. Do Young Writer (if he exists) and Cute Neighbor (who may be a psychopathic killer) find happiness running into each other's arms on the sunkissed beach, at the end? You'd have to view this mess to find out, but I'd advise against it.
A final note: at the San Francisco LGBT Film Festival screening, derisive laughter erupted during the most "dramatic" moments and the film was booed. Don't say you weren't warned.
A final note: at the San Francisco LGBT Film Festival screening, derisive laughter erupted during the most "dramatic" moments and the film was booed. Don't say you weren't warned.
... but I've seen worse
tuckered-249593 March 2021
The beginning of any great movie is a good script. This does not have that... but I've seen worse. The cinematography is bad... but I've seen worse. The editing fuels the disjointed script... but I've seen worse. This movie is directed by its screenwriter, he knows what he wants to see but it does not connect well with an audience that is not so close to the subject matter... but I've seen worse. The main score is straight out of a 1970's porn film. The parts of the score that captioned the "eerie music" is "Jingle Bells, Jingle All The Way" set in a minor key with bad electronic instrumentation (probably for budget's sake.)... but I've heard worse. There is zero concept of the secondary character having a mental problem, only bad dreams of people he cares about getting hurt. It's not until it is spelled out, two-thirds of the way into the movie, that we find out that he suffers from a mental disease. The symptoms of the disease is not explained, full-stop. So if you don't know anything about said affliction, you won't get this disjointed film... but I've seen worse. The character that writes the book is "maybe" abducted by aliens?! This simply is bad writing, bad editing, bad continuity, bad directing and an awful waste of celluloid. The same could be said about every scene that the female character (and her acting ability, or the lack there of) could have saved more budget by not filming these sequences or at least try to save the films integrity by leaving those bad scenes on the cutting room floor... I can't say I've seen worse. The original songs in the score are contrite, the lyrics make no sense from one line of the tune to the next. What exactly was their point and what were they trying to say that enhances the film? Nothing. The best that can be said of the songs is that they did not attempt to use cliche lyrics (listen to "The Morning After" from the film "The Poseidon Adventure". Every cliche ever imagined is used in that song except "It was a dark and stormy night.") So, congratulations on using unconventional lyrics, but please try to make them coherent so that they make sense and move the story line along... I can't say I've heard worse.
The actors, in moments, show some acting ability but seem to be not quite sure how to stay properly in frame. Some of this is not their fault. The director wanted an extreme close up in some scenes, so the acting comes off as untrained in what exactly the phrase "what is my frame" means... but I've seen worse.
Off the rails
dkgradecki-223767 August 2022
Gay filmmaker all but disappears up his own navel
showtrmp21 April 2012
Warning: Spoilers
A prime example of the self-indulgent, self-important, opaquely "arty" kind of offering that is destroying gay filmmaking. On the commentary track, the director makes references to Bunuel and "Last Year at Marienbad", which is never a good sign, and the fragmentary, senseless movie he came up with fully lives up to his pretentiousness. It's full of flashbacks, flash-forwards, quick inserts of violent incidents that might or might not have happened, and repeated shots of male/male outdoor hosedowns, which I guess are supposed to be symbolic of SOMETHING. In between, the two male leads engage in interminable bedroom question-and-answer sessions that are like an idiot's idea of Socrates. (I was waiting for someone to ask, "What flavor of ice cream would you most like to be?", as it was the only unanswered question left, but nothing in the film was even up to that intellectual level). The dialogue is delivered in a nasal, affectless California drone, which is probably the right choice for the "hypnotic", surreal effect aimed for--in the few scenes where the actors try to deliver genuine emotion, they are hopelessly bad. Under all the fancy maneuvers, there seems to be a "statement" connecting coming out with violence and repression, which we've all heard a thousand times. And don't be fooled by the marketing--the very brief sex scenes provided are clunky, overlit, and slightly embarrassing. A soap commercial would be more erotic.
Knock Knock
dmoorejdrf20 December 2021
This movie knocks on the door of being a great romance with some hot man to man sex scenes, ut it never opens the door, just leaves the viewer and the two lead characters unfulfilled. Why is it that writers/directors shy away from taking story from average to tasteful art? This is just another average gay movie....nothing new to see here!
Made sense to me
charmaigne2 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
The acting was fair and the production values amateur, and thus I gave it an 8. But the storyline made sense and was actually very engaging.
Note: The following gives away a lot, so read at your own risk.
Maybe it's just my education in counseling psychology and my clinical practice, but I sensed early on that Leo was schizophrenic, possibly suffering from Dissociative Identity Disorder (DSM-IV-TR 300.14), formerly Multiple Personality Disorder. Thus when he drives off with Teddy's manuscript on the front seat, the author on the front page is Leo Spaulding. To me, Leo and Teddy seemed to be the same person. Crispin (his agent) knows Leo can write, when given a quiet place in which to be delusional for a while. An insane genius. Cause of the schism could be traced back to his inability to cope rationally with his homosexuality. Note too the frequent use of water, which is often used to symbolize the subconscious and the dream world. When viewed from the perspective that these two personalities inhabit the same man (note that Leo can't really account for himself when away from Teddy), the story seemed perfectly logical and enthralling. Too clinical? Perhaps, but I loved the story.
Charmaigne
Note: The following gives away a lot, so read at your own risk.
Maybe it's just my education in counseling psychology and my clinical practice, but I sensed early on that Leo was schizophrenic, possibly suffering from Dissociative Identity Disorder (DSM-IV-TR 300.14), formerly Multiple Personality Disorder. Thus when he drives off with Teddy's manuscript on the front seat, the author on the front page is Leo Spaulding. To me, Leo and Teddy seemed to be the same person. Crispin (his agent) knows Leo can write, when given a quiet place in which to be delusional for a while. An insane genius. Cause of the schism could be traced back to his inability to cope rationally with his homosexuality. Note too the frequent use of water, which is often used to symbolize the subconscious and the dream world. When viewed from the perspective that these two personalities inhabit the same man (note that Leo can't really account for himself when away from Teddy), the story seemed perfectly logical and enthralling. Too clinical? Perhaps, but I loved the story.
Charmaigne
why I enjoyed it
gbalan18 May 2007
There are several reasons to consider 'Sun Kissed' an exceptional movie. What most impressed me is the light it throws on the male world that hates discovering itself as gay, even though this impulse is a reality of its own soul depths. Contemplating the evolution of Leo, we witness his slow sexual awakening, in painful conflict with the prejudices of the character, obsessed with the idea "I am not homosexual." So it is he, the supposed heterosexual, who appears inwardly divided to the point of schizophrenia, in contrast to Teddy, who knows very well that he is "completely" gay and draws a remarkable inner balance from this consciousness, in spite of his moments of despair. As such he shows himself to be healthier and more mature than Leo, even taking a certain protecting and enlightening role toward him.
It is also possible to take into consideration the philosophical aspect of this love story, urging us to reflect about fate, death and the meaning of life, and the sense of love in its relation to solitude. Do we love only because, otherwise, this solitude would be unbearable? And over these issues hangs a meditative and poetic spirit that ennobles the sexual side, naturally predominant. The loneliness of these two souls in the middle of the loneliness of Nature creates a nearly magical atmosphere. I felt incited to view this captivating movie again, as one might listen again to the music of a great master. Professor George Balan, Germany
It is also possible to take into consideration the philosophical aspect of this love story, urging us to reflect about fate, death and the meaning of life, and the sense of love in its relation to solitude. Do we love only because, otherwise, this solitude would be unbearable? And over these issues hangs a meditative and poetic spirit that ennobles the sexual side, naturally predominant. The loneliness of these two souls in the middle of the loneliness of Nature creates a nearly magical atmosphere. I felt incited to view this captivating movie again, as one might listen again to the music of a great master. Professor George Balan, Germany
10 For Gregory Marcel
donwc199626 June 2014
I'm giving the male lead, Gregory Marcel, a ten because he is a ten - what a chunk. In fact, he is the only reason I watched this dreadful film as long as I did. Bottom line, this film is in search of a story and it just never finds it. No story, no movie, but the director/writer continues on as though everything is okay when nothing is okay at all. The film is an absolute mish-mash of ideas that do never come together so you are left hanging with one storyline after another that doesn't connect with any other storyline. Yikes! What goes on here? I stuck it out almost to the end but even hunky Gregory Marcel wasn't enough to keep me going when the endless story lines just wore me out!
interesting movie
didier-202 October 2007
amazing negative comment i just read here about this movie..... i couldn't agree less- it's indie-fayre - and it's unconventional narrative in the strong sense of the word- it's good because you can leave it and it's working on several levels - so don't try and reduce it to one single rational story.
If i had a criticism of it it is that it stereotypes mental illness as always being something around uncontrollable feelings of murder, blood and sharp knives - this is it's biggest flaw for me and in a way it's a BIG flaw and totally unforgivable. i could imagine why it was booed in San Francisco because many dated mainstream films used to portray gay protagonists in this light. but the director does play with this expectation, leaving you guessing about the outcome.
As a gay love affair its optimistic in it's conclusions - and as a portrait of intimacy it is very brave and rich.
If i had a criticism of it it is that it stereotypes mental illness as always being something around uncontrollable feelings of murder, blood and sharp knives - this is it's biggest flaw for me and in a way it's a BIG flaw and totally unforgivable. i could imagine why it was booed in San Francisco because many dated mainstream films used to portray gay protagonists in this light. but the director does play with this expectation, leaving you guessing about the outcome.
As a gay love affair its optimistic in it's conclusions - and as a portrait of intimacy it is very brave and rich.
Two beautiful men fall in love...
korduroy6 July 2006
Gripping and grabbing from the start, this movie is (simplistically) about two young men, strangers who meet by a curious design. They then become your favorite fairy tale, and perhaps will carve a hunk of sex/love out of you, and hang it overhead and inside at the same time.
I'd give you a linear description of "Sun Kissed," but that's not possible; it exists rather in a spiral time/space frame--no need worrying WHERE and WHEN you are, but just give thanks that you're in a good and beautiful (and fine-smelling place, a aspect of attraction curiously neglected heretofore).It may be occasionally agonizing--but it's always very sexy. Written, directed and produced by Patrick McGuinn, the film puts the breathtaking Gregory Marcel (whose character defines this movie as James Dean defined "Rebel.." for example). Marcel is handsomely complemented by John Ort's needful-though-brilliant and erotically super-charged narrator. Gorgeous cinematography (without which there is never a real movie), in case you think I only care about how they look and smell. For those few of you who worry about love, and/or want to see lots of it, this is your late-summer early-autumn movie. It works really well when it's very cold, by the way. Think of Proust comtemplating a marble statue of St. Sebastian, if that might help.
Not for Lesbians, nor wannabe's thereof.
I'd give you a linear description of "Sun Kissed," but that's not possible; it exists rather in a spiral time/space frame--no need worrying WHERE and WHEN you are, but just give thanks that you're in a good and beautiful (and fine-smelling place, a aspect of attraction curiously neglected heretofore).It may be occasionally agonizing--but it's always very sexy. Written, directed and produced by Patrick McGuinn, the film puts the breathtaking Gregory Marcel (whose character defines this movie as James Dean defined "Rebel.." for example). Marcel is handsomely complemented by John Ort's needful-though-brilliant and erotically super-charged narrator. Gorgeous cinematography (without which there is never a real movie), in case you think I only care about how they look and smell. For those few of you who worry about love, and/or want to see lots of it, this is your late-summer early-autumn movie. It works really well when it's very cold, by the way. Think of Proust comtemplating a marble statue of St. Sebastian, if that might help.
Not for Lesbians, nor wannabe's thereof.
A Sun-soaked mystery reminiscent of the French New Wave
savdavid29 November 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Blending elements of French New Wave, avant-garde, Jack Smith films and Rene Clement's PLEIN SOLEIL (1960), SUNKISSED is a boldly surreal film that injects real experimentation into the gay indie genre.
Non-linear storytelling, temporal warping, shifting identities and even flashes of horror kept me intrigued and guessing throughout, while I admired the beautifully grainy and sun-soaked cinematography that matched the desert setting.
The film is like a dream you have when you fall asleep in the sun. On the surface it's about a young writer (Teddy) who tries to finish a novel in a rented house out in the desert, but falls in love with the place's sexy young caretaker (Leo) who may or may not be responsible for his wife's murder.
The homoeroticism is fun to watch of course for a gay viewer, but what really compelled me is what the film had to say about the treacherous nature of love, how quickly it can cross into obsession, and whether or not it's possible to ever really know someone's true nature.
The motif of biting throughout the film underscores how quickly sexual obsession can cross over into violence.
The hallucinogenic flashes of blood and horror provide possible clues to what really happened to the young novelist, but ultimately the unstable nature of Leo makes you question even that.
I felt like Gregory Marcel was the stronger actor of the two male leads, but cast and crew combine to create a compellingly surreal, sexy, low-budget thriller that should be admired for its audacity.
Non-linear storytelling, temporal warping, shifting identities and even flashes of horror kept me intrigued and guessing throughout, while I admired the beautifully grainy and sun-soaked cinematography that matched the desert setting.
The film is like a dream you have when you fall asleep in the sun. On the surface it's about a young writer (Teddy) who tries to finish a novel in a rented house out in the desert, but falls in love with the place's sexy young caretaker (Leo) who may or may not be responsible for his wife's murder.
The homoeroticism is fun to watch of course for a gay viewer, but what really compelled me is what the film had to say about the treacherous nature of love, how quickly it can cross into obsession, and whether or not it's possible to ever really know someone's true nature.
The motif of biting throughout the film underscores how quickly sexual obsession can cross over into violence.
The hallucinogenic flashes of blood and horror provide possible clues to what really happened to the young novelist, but ultimately the unstable nature of Leo makes you question even that.
I felt like Gregory Marcel was the stronger actor of the two male leads, but cast and crew combine to create a compellingly surreal, sexy, low-budget thriller that should be admired for its audacity.
Riveting
RoyMince29 September 2023
Keeping an eye on this director is something you do because the future is Bright for this one. This movie is daring, risk-taking, and provides dark impact for filming experience to the viewer. This is one of those films that I would consider a complete package because the directing production, the acting even the cinematic shots, they all fit perfectly. The beauty in independent films is shown when the entire cast and crew believes in the project. Keeping an eye on this director is something you do because the future is Bright for this one.
I definitely recommend this film because it's new its storyline is creative and the finished product is meaningful. This film for sure gets two thumbs up.
I definitely recommend this film because it's new its storyline is creative and the finished product is meaningful. This film for sure gets two thumbs up.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
